and Faculty Scholarship: A Pilot Study

From their inception, community colleges have been designated as teaching institutions. Consequently, a dichotomy in higher education has emerged. On one side, community colleges emphasize teaching; on the other side, research universities and other four-year institutions em-phasize both teaching and research. This emphasis on teaching at the community college has its own dichotomy. On the positive side, faculty serve as mentors and sources of motivation and inspiration for their students. They believe in the Amen-can dream of providing equal opportunity to all Americans, regardless of background. The open door college is a unique American phenomenon. Many first-generation college students would not have had the slightest chance of acquiring a college education were it not for community col-leges and their faculty. Teaching at this level is the first building block in the long process of higher education. On the negative, side, however, community colleges are considered, in the words of Zwerling (1976), as "second best. " Consequently, their faculty are considered to be second best as well. They are viewed as neither challenged enough nor challenging to their students in the en-deavor of higher learning. Because community college faculty do not engage in research, some critics associate the community college with a poor quality of education. Community college presidents and chiefacademic officers (vice presi-dents and deans) have a major role to play in shaping the future and direction of scholarship at the community college. They hold the keys for change, namely institutionalization of scholarship at the communit